1
Cri.BailAppln.No.633/22­Ex.1
Order below Exh.1 in Cri. Bail Application No.633/ 2022
Gorakh Nandu Jadhav
.. Applicant
Accused.

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra
through PI Ambad Police St.
(Cr. No. I 164/2022)
.. Respondent.

Order below Exh. 1
1.

The
applicant/accused Gorakh Nandu Jadhav
claims bail in C.R. No. I­164/2022 for the offences punishable
under Sections 498­A, 306, 304­B r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal
Code registered with Ambad Police Station.

2.

Heard Learned Advocate Shri K.P.Shirode, for the
applicant and learned A.P.P. Smt. Sangale for the State and also
the intervenor.

Informant is present. Perused the papers of
investigation.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that applicant and the
deceased was married on 14.10.2021. Since after the marriage,
applicant used to illtreat and harass the deceased for unlawful
demand.

It is further contention of informant that time and
2
Cri.BailAppln.No.633/22­Ex.1
again, deceased used to tell about the same to them but due to
financial paucity, they could not fulfill demand of applicant.
The harassment to the deceased was continued and she was left
with other no option but to commit suicide thereby she has
hanged herself at the house of applicant.

4.

Ld. Advocate for the applicant submitted that the
report lodged by the informant is quiet vague.
specifications as to alleged incident.

There are no
Deceased was educated
and has completed her Nursing Course.

There is no any
previous report lodged by the deceased or by the informant
against the applicant.

Applicant has good financial source and
there was no question to demand money from the relatives of
deceased.
offence.

There is no prima facie evidence as to the alleged
Report lodged by the informant is out of grudge,
therefore, ld. Advocate for the applicant submitted that the
applicant be released on bail.
5.

Intervenor has filed documents and written notes of
argument.

Ld. APP has also resisted the application with the
contention that prima facie case against the applicant is made
out.

There was consistent harassment to the deceased by the
applicant.

There are specific averments in the report which
shows that there was much harassment to the deceased, even in
the last incident mentioned in the report, reflects that deceased
was left with other no option but to commit suicide. There were
3
Cri.BailAppln.No.633/22­Ex.1
phone calls between the deceased and her maternal relatives and
also in between applicant and the informant.

So also,
investigation is not yet completed. Therefore, ld. APP requested
to reject the application.

6.

On perusal of record, it reveals that there are specific
allegations with date of incident.

Marriage of deceased was
solemnized on 14.10.2020 and she has committed suicide on
14.04.2022 within two years of her marriage.

It is pertinent to
note that deceased was pregnant at the time of her death. PM
report reflect the said aspect. Nature of death i.e. suicidal is not
in dispute at this prima facie stage. Further, it is observed that
on the fateful day, deceased made contact with her mother. She
told her about extreme illtreatment at the hands of applicant.
Even the applicant made phone­call to the brother of deceased at
about 03.11 p.m. and asked him to send money whatever would
be there in his account.
immediately during the period.

Deceased committed suicide
At about 3.18 pm, applicant
informed the brother of deceased about the suicide committed by
her.

This prima facie averment reflects that soon before her
death, deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the
applicant in connection with unlawful demand.

7.

As such, prima facie case against the applicant is
established.

Offence allegedly committed by the applicant is
4
Cri.BailAppln.No.633/22­Ex.1
very much serious and heinous in nature. Punishment for such
an offence is severe which may extend to imprisonment for life.
If the applicant would be released on bail, there is every
possibility that he may pressurize the witnesses and tamper
with the prosecution evidence.

Considering all these aspects,
this Court is of the view that applicant is not entitled for bail.
Hence, the order.

:: O R D E R ::
Application (Exh.1) stands rejected.
ADITEE
UDAY
KADAM
Nashik.
Date : 09.06.2022.

Digitally
signed by
ADITEE
UDAY
KADAM
Date:
2022.06.09
15:52:36 0600
(Aditee U. Kadam)
Additional Sessions Judge­2,
Nashik.